By GENE POLICINSKI
First Amendment Center
Two national tragedies separated by six years and a day – the April 15 bombing at the Boston Marathon and the April 16, 2007, mass shooting at Virginia Tech University – also are notable in marking how technology is reshaping our freedoms of speech and press.

Before we get to the chief thrust of this column, we would be remiss if we did not remind the readers that we are now entering that special time of the year for loyal East Tennesseans, to-wit poke-picking time.

The real reason the background-checks bill failed in the U.S. Senate is because the citizens have come to distrust this president and members of Congress after four plus years of constant lying to the public.

Most reasonable people would agree that background checks are a valuable tool when used properly, but this bill had language in it that transferred too much authority to Eric Holder (the thug from Chicago) to enable him to restrict our ability to purchase a firearm.

By CHARLES C. HAYNES
First Amendment Center
Imagine Robert Ingersoll’s hurt and humiliation last month when his local florist refused to do the flower arrangements for his wedding to Curt Freed, his partner of nine years.

As longtime customers of Arlene’s Flowers and Gifts in Richland, Wash., Ingersoll and Freed had mistakenly assumed that shop owner Barronelle Stutzman would be happy to provide the service.

But also imagine the pain Stutzman felt at having to turn down a friend and neighbor.

Boston’s lesson can be summed up this way: many hundreds of volunteers, law enforcement officers and untold numbers of undercover agents WITH many guns and lots of firepower failed to do their only job.

The brazen act of a terrorist, or terrorists, either deranged or motivated by an as-yet unknown agenda, ravaged the Boston Marathon runners and supporters with a common type of crude bomb. Could even more guns on site have prevented this tragedy?